Coincidance - Principia Discordia

COINCIDANCE 183
officials were found guilty of crimes against humanity at Nuremberg. But
the Nuremberg judgements went further and laid down in 1946 that
planning and conspiring to wage war against civilian populations is itself a
crime. This was felt necessary at the time, and is, in fact, based on common
law, where conspiracy to commit a crime is itself a crime.
You mean, it is like the law under which planning and preparing to commit murder is itself
criminal.
Yes. The Nuremberg tribunal precisely ruled that planning, preparing
and conspiring to commit mass murder is criminal. The United Nations
General Assembly in 1950 again reaffirmed that planning for wars
involving "wanton destruction of cities" is a crime, and so is preparing
"inhuman acts done against any civilian population."
Most people do not understand that. They think a war crime happens only when the bomb is
actually set off.
The Rand Corporation understands the law as I understand it. In a report
of January 1982 they stated that the policy of Assured Destruction, as it is
called, which underlies the deployment of these missiles "is unlawful under
the international law of armed conflict" and that, under the Nuremberg and
other precedents, not only states but individuals can be judged criminally
liable for such acts. The Rand Report specifically warns that "Following
military orders or ignorance of the law are insufficient defenses, for the
individual and his or her superior officers are obliged to know the law and to
recognize manifestly unlawful orders." General George S. Brown made the
same points when he was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1976.
Military men in general understand these laws because they are obliged to.
As the Rand Report said, the current U.S. policy is "more the creature of
civilians than military minds." Reagan and his advisors are ignorant civilians
who do not realize that they are criminal terrorists under international law,
even though the Rand Report tells them so and tells them that they are
obliged to know these laws.
Is this perhaps why the United States has recently announced that it will not allow the
International Court of justice ot hear complaints against it and pass judgement on them?
I don't know. The main reasons for that, I imagine, is that Reagan and his
advisors know they would be condemned by the Court if it heard the
evidence concerning their crimes against international law in Central
America, especially the mining of the harbors of Nicaragua, and their
terrorism in Lebanon. I was there, in Lebanon, and I saw what they have done,
Whole cities, which had no connection with the struggle at all, have been
obliterated.
In the last two years have heard incredible bitterness expressed against Reagan's policies all